news’s report The Colonel and the Women is another sad example of a serious whistleblowing case that the Armed Forces’ management has handled in an unimpressive way. In light of this and a number of other cases that have emerged recently, it is frightening that the Chief of Defense is far more concerned with talking about his values than with actually taking action. The case of the former battalion commander, who is today a colonel, is thus about an officer who, according to one of the women news has interviewed, over time has harassed several of his female subordinates. The battalion commander, by virtue of his rank and position, had considerable power over these women and sat with the decision-making authority when one of the women wanted to switch to another military position to face new challenges. This woman – to whom the battalion commander has previously both assaulted and sent sexualized messages – is asked by the battalion commander: What does he get for her to change positions? A person who asks this question is obviously not looking for “nothing” in return. The woman understands this, knowing that her answer may influence the boss’s decision in her favor. It does not seem unreasonable to claim that the battalion commander’s behavior in this case is reminiscent of what is called abuse of position – something another officer was recently convicted of. After repeated warnings against the battalion commander, the Armed Forces ‘reaction was clear: A written warning (which was to be deleted after a year and a half) – as well as a promotion from lieutenant colonel to colonel and course place in one of the Armed Forces’ most prestigious leadership courses. At Dagsrevyen on Saturday 2 July, the chief of the Defense Staff, Elisabeth Natvig, nevertheless stated that this colonel had received “a fairly strong reaction”. It is difficult to grasp and impossible to accept. The red card, not the tackle With or without help from his advisers, Chief of Defense Eirik Kristoffersen has recently come to the conclusion that there should be a zero vision related to bullying and harassment, and not just a zero tolerance. A vision of a total absence of bullying and harassment sounds good, but it is not much more realistic than if the Norwegian Football Association should have had a zero vision for ugly tackles on the football field. If a player finds it too good to put a tackle in someone’s kneecaps, then there is little one can do in advance to prevent it (although attitude-creating work and focus on fair play must of course be expected to have a not insignificant effect). Therefore, no one blames the football association for trampling on the field at regular intervals. But the criticism should hail if the judges never saw what happened – or did not dare to use the deck. It is therefore so obvious that the Chief of Defense misunderstands the problem complex when he tries to find solutions with the help of new visions, nicely sounding core values and technicalities related to the warning system. Of course, we do not expect the Armed Forces to be able to overcome all inappropriate behavior, but we do expect the Armed Forces to give the red card to those who step far beyond the border. Hanne Eggen Røislien seems to be in on the same thing when she writes in Morgenbladet that «The disappointment is not only related to the fact that [trakassering] happens, but that the Armed Forces do not take real action to a greater extent. ” To target a talkative colonel One of the saddest things about the ongoing whistleblowing debate in and about the Armed Forces is the absence of senior serving officers in the discussion. The officers at the rank level from major to colonel seem to be particularly goal-oriented. Now, of course, it is not the case that every officer is obliged to have a public opinion on these matters. At the same time, I had clearly expected greater participation from the usually so offensive colonels who seem concerned with influencing the defense discourse. In the debates concerning the Armed Forces’ structure or alternative defense concepts, few have problems claiming that Officer A is too narrow or that the retired General B has left the stern. But as soon as the debate is about some of our own colleagues breaking with the Armed Forces’ core values in a completely unacceptable way, then it becomes silent from the colonels. The involvement in the ongoing warning debate seems to come from the grassroots, perhaps especially the lieutenants and captains, as well as from retired officers who no longer have anything to lose. It is a pity that the officers at the intermediate levels do not see how effective a clear position from them had been. For example, by a colonel arguing that one should not become a colonel if one harasses one’s subordinates over time. But perhaps this is not the common colonel’s view or perhaps only the ceiling height is perceived as too low. The Chief of Defence’s most important priority During his two years as Chief of Defense, Eirik Kristoffersen has been very concerned with emphasizing that the Defence’s core values of respect, responsibility and courage are his highest priority as head of department. The mantra was largely the same when he was army chief from 2019 to 2020. Ten days after he took over as defense chief, he wrote the following: “I have set our values as my most important priority as defense chief. Respect for our mission, for our fellow soldiers for the society around us and respect for the adversary, are absolutely fundamental to our success. Responsibility for keeping order in one’s own house and responsibility for making the right decisions – even when the situation is unclear. ” This is clear speech, but it says little about how respect, responsibility and courage are actually observed in practice. The large number of poorly handled notification cases that have emerged recently unfortunately indicates a significant gap between life and learning. Now it is high time that the Chief of Defense takes action to get “order in his own house”. If he does not succeed – his main priority over two years – he should consider his own position. The columnist is captain and company commander in His Majesty the King’s Guard, but writes as a private person and not on behalf of the Armed Forces.
ttn-69
Life and learning – Expression
